Saturday, June 25, 2005


Mr George Bush,

President of the United States of America

For sometime now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, specially in political. forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hopes that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them.

Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the great Messenger of God, Feel obliged to respect human rights,Present liberalism as a civilization model, Announce one’s opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and WMDs, Make “War and Terror” his slogan,And finally,Work towards the establishment of a unified international community – a community which Christ and the virtuous of the Earth will one day govern,

But at the same time,

Have countries attacked; The lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed and on the slight chance of the … of a … criminals in a village city, or convoy for example the entire village, city or convey set ablaze.

Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around one hundred thousand people killed, its water sources, agriculture and industry destroyed, close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, sanctity of private homes of citizens broken, and the country pushed back perhaps fifty years. At what price? Hundreds of billions of dollars spent from the treasury of one country and certain other countries and tens of thousands of young men and women – as occupation troops – put in harms way, taken away from family and love ones, their hands stained with the blood of others, subjected to so much psychological pressure that everyday some commit suicide ant those returning home suffer depression, become sickly and grapple with all sorts of aliments; while some are killed and their bodies handed of their families.

On the pretext of the existence of WMDs, this great tragedy came to engulf both the peoples of the occupied and the occupying country. Later it was revealed that no WMDs existed to begin with. Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was toppled along the way towards another goal, nevertheless the people of the region are happy about it. I point out that throughout the many years of the … war on Iran Saddam was supported by the West.

Mr President,

You might know that I am a teacher. My students ask me how can theses actions be reconciled with the values outlined at the beginning of this letter and duty to the tradition of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the Messenger of peace and forgiveness.

Page 2

There are prisoners in Guantanamo Bay that have not been tried, have no legal representation,their families cannot see them and are obviously kept in a strange land outside their own country. There is no international monitoring of their conditions and fate. No one knows whether they are prisoners, POWs, accused or criminals.European investigators have confirmed the existence of secret prisons in Europe too. I could not correlate the abduction of a person, and him or her being kept in secret prisons, with the provisions of any judicial system. For that matter, I fail to understand how such actions correspond to the values outlined in the beginning of this letter, i.e. the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH), human rights and liberal values.

Young people, university students and ordinary people have many questions about the phenomenon of Israel.I am sure you are familiar with some of them. Throughout history many countries have been occupied, but I think the establishment of a new country with a new people,is a new phenomenon that is exclusive to our times. Students are saying that sixty years ago such a country did no exist.The show old documents and globes and say try as we have, we have not been able to find a country named Israel.

I tell them to study the history of WWI and II. One of my students told me that during WWII, which more than tens of millions of people perished in, news about the war, was quickly disseminated by the warring parties. Each touted their victories and the most recent battlefront defeat of the other party. After the war, they claimed that six million Jews had been killed. Six million people that were surely related to at least two million families.

Again let us assume that these events are true. Does that logically translate into the establishment of the state of Israel in the Middle East or support for such a state? How can this phenomenon be rationalised or explained?

Mr President,

I am sure you know how – and at what cost – Israel was established:
- Many thousands were killed in the process.
- Millions of indigenous people were made refugees.
- Hundred of thousands of hectares of farmland, olive plantations, towns and villages
were destroyed.

This tragedy is not exclusive to the time of establishment; unfortunately it has been ongoing for sixty years now.

A regime has been established which does not show mercy even to kids, destroys houses while the occupants are still in them, announces beforehand its list and plans to assassinate palestinian figures and keeps thousands of Palestinians in prison. Such a phenomenon is unique – or at the very least extremely rare – in recent memory.

Another big question asked by people is why is this regime being supported?
Is support for this regime in line with the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH) or Moses (PBUH) or liberal values?

Or are we to understand that allowing the original inhabitants of these lands – inside andoutside Palestine – whether they are Christian, Muslim or Jew, to determine their fate, runs

Page 3

contrary to principles of democracy, human rights and the teachings of prophets? If not, why is there so much opposition to a referendum?

The newly elected Palestinian administration recently took office. All independent observes have confirmed that this government represents the electorate. Unbelievingly, they have put the elected government under pressure and have advised it to recognise the Israeli regime, abandon the struggle and follow the programs of the previous government.

If the current Palestinian government had run on the above platform, would the Palestinian people have voted for it? Again, can such position taken in opposition to the Palestinian government be reconciled with the values outlined earlier? The people are also saying “why are all UNSC resolutions in condemnation of Israel vetoed?”

Mr President,

As you are well aware, I live amongst the people and am in constant contact with them -- many people from around the Middle East manage to contact me as well. They dot not have faith in these dubious policies either. There is evidence that the people of the region are becoming increasingly angry with such policies.

It is not my intention to pose to many questions, but I need to refer to other points as well. Why is it that any technological and scientific achievement reached in the Middle East regions is translated into and portrayed as a threat to the Zionist regime? Is not scientific R&D one of the basic rights of nations.

You are familiar with history. Aside from the Middle Ages, in what other point in history has scientific and technical progress been a crime? Can the possibility of scientific achievements being utilised for military purposes be reason enough to oppose science and technology altogether? If such a supposition is true, then all scientific disciplines, including physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, engineering, etc. must be opposed.

Lies were told in the Iraqi matter. What was the result? I have no doubt that telling lies is reprehensible in any culture, and you do not like to be lied to.

Mr President,

Don’t Latin Americans have the right to ask, why their elected governments are being
opposed and coup leaders supported? Or, why must they constantly be threatened and live in fear?

The people of Africa are hardworking, creative and talented. They can play an important and valuable role in providing for the needs of humanity and contribute to its material and spiritual progress. Poverty and hardship in large parts of Africa are preventing this from happening. Don’t they have the right to ask why their enormous wealth – including minerals – is being looted, despite the fact that they need it more than others?

Again, do such actions correspond to the teachings of Christ and the tenets of human rights?

Page 4

The brave and faithful people of Iran too have many questions and grievances, including: the coup d’etat of 1953 and the subsequent toppling of the legal government of the day, opposition to the Islamic revolution, transformation of an Embassy into a headquarters supporting, the activities of those opposing the Islamic Republic (many thousands of pages of documents corroborates this claim), support for Saddam in the war waged against Iran, the shooting down of the Iranian passenger plane, freezing the assets of the Iranian nation, increasing threats, anger and displeasure vis-à-vis the scientific and nuclear progress of the Iranian nation (just when all Iranians are jubilant and collaborating their country’s progress), and many other grievances that I will not refer to in this letter.

Mr President,

September Eleven was a horrendous incident. The killing of innocents is deplorable and appalling in any part of the world. Our government immediately declared its disgust with the perpetrators and offered its condolences to the bereaved and expressed its sympathies.

All governments have a duty to protect the lives, property and good standing of their citizens. Reportedly your government employs extensive security, protection and intelligence systems and even hunts its opponents abroad. September eleven was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess.

Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren’t those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?

All governments have a duty to provide security and peace of mind for their citizens. For some years now, the people of your country and neighbours of world trouble spots do not have peace of mind. After 9.11, instead of healing and tending to the emotional wounds of the survivors and the American people – who had been immensely traumatised by the attacks some Western media only intensified the climates of fear and insecurity – some constantly talked about the possibility of new terror attacks and kept the people in fear. Is that service to the American people? Is it possible to calculate the damages incurred from fear and panic?

American citizen lived in constant fear of fresh attacks that could come at any moment and in any place. They felt insecure in the streets, in their place of work and at home. Who would be happy with this situation? Why was the media, instead of conveying a feeling of security and providing peace of mind, giving rise to a feeling of insecurity?

Some believe that the hype paved the way – and was the justification – for an attack on Afghanistan. Again I need to refer to the role of media.

In media charters, correct dissemination of information and honest reporting of a story are established tenets. I express my deep regret about the disregard shown by certain Western media for these principles. The main pretext for an attack on Iraq was the existence of WMDs. This was repeated incessantly – for the public to, finally, believe – and the ground set for an attack on Iraq.

Will the truth not be lost in a contrive and deceptive climate? Again, if the truth is allowed to be lost, how can that be reconciled with the earlier mentioned values?

Is the truth known to the Almighty lost as well?

Page 5

Mr President,

In countries around the world, citizens provide for the expenses of governments so that their governments in turn are able to serve them. The question here is “what has the hundreds of billions of dollars, spent every year to pay for the Iraqi campaign, produced for the citizens?”

As your Excellency is aware, in some states of your country, people are living in poverty. Many thousands are homeless and unemployment is a huge problem. Of course these problems exist – to a larger or lesser extent – in other countries as well. With these conditions in mind, can the gargantuan expenses of the campaign – paid from the public treasury – be explained and be consistent with the aforementioned principles?

What has been said, are some of the grievances of the people around the world, in our region and in your country. But my main contention – which I am hoping you will agree to some of it – is:

Those in power have specific time in office, and do not rule indefinitely, but their names will be recorded in history and will be constantly judged in the immediate and distant futures. The people will scrutinize our presidencies.

Did we manage to bring peace, security and prosperity for the people or insecurity and unemployment? Did we intend to establish justice, or just supported especial interest groups, and by forcing many people to live in poverty and hardship, made a few people rich and powerful – thus trading the approval of the people and the Almighty with theirs’?

Did we defend the rights of the underprivileged or ignore them?

Did we defend the rights of all people around the world or imposed wars on them, interfered illegally in their affairs, established hellish prisons and incarcerated some of them?

Did we bring the world peace and security or raised the specter of intimidation and threats?

Did we tell the truth to our nation and others around the world or presented an inverted version of it?

Were we on the side of people or the occupiers and oppressors?

Did our administration set out to promote rational behaviour, logic, ethics, peace, fulfilling obligations, justice, service to the people, prosperity, progress and respect for human dignity or the force of guns. Intimidation, insecurity, disregard for the people, delaying the progress and excellence of other nations, and trample on people’s rights?

And finally, they will judge us on whether we remained true to our oath of office – to serve the people, which is our main task, and the traditions of the prophets – or not?

Mr President,

How much longer can the world tolerate this situation? Where will this trend lead the world to? How long must the people of the world pay for the incorrect decisions of some rulers? How much longer will the specter of insecurity – raised from the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction – hunt the people of the world?

Page 6

How much longer will the blood of the innocent men, women and children be spilled on the streets, and people’s houses destroyed over their heads? Are you pleased with the current condition of the world? Do you think present policies can continue?

If billions of dollars spent on security, military campaigns and troop movement were instead spent on investment and assistance for poor countries, promotion of health, combating different diseases, education and improvement of mental and physical fitness, assistance to the victims of natural disasters, creation of employment opportunities and production, development projects and poverty alleviation, establishment of peace, mediation between disputing states and distinguishing the flames of racial, ethnic and other conflicts were would the world be today? Would not your government, and people be justifiably proud?

Would not your administration’s political and economic standing have been stronger?
And I am most sorry to say, would there have been an ever increasing global hatred of the American governments?

Mr President, it is not my intention to distress anyone.

If prophet Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ishmael, Joseph or Jesus Christ (PBUH) were with us
today, how would they have judged such behaviour? Will we be given a role to play in the promised world, where justice will become universal and Jesus Christ (PBUH) will be present? Will they even accept us?

My basic question is this: Is there no better way to interact with the rest of the world? Today there are hundreds of millions of Christians, hundreds of millions of Moslems and millions of people who follow the teachings of Moses (PBUH). All divine religions share and respect on word and that is “monotheism” or belief in a single God and no other in the world.

The holy Koran stresses this common word and calls on an followers of divine religions and says: [3.64] Say: O followers of the Book! Come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate aught. With Him and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah, but if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. (The Family of Imran).

Mr President,

According to divine verses, we have all been called upon to worship one God and follow the teachings of divine prophets.

“To worship a God which is above all powers in the world and can do all He pleases.” “The Lord which knows that which is hidden and visible, the past and the future, knows what goes on in the Hearts of His servants and records their deeds.”

“The Lord who is the possessor of the heavens and the earth and all universe is His court”“planning for the universe is done by His hands, and gives His servants the glad tidings of mercy and forgiveness of sins”. “He is the companion of the oppressed and the enemy of oppressors”. “He is the Compassionate, the Merciful”. “He is the recourse of the faithful and guides them towards the light from darkness”. “He is witness to the actions of His servants”, “He calls on servants to be faithful and do good deeds, and asks them to stay on the path of righteousness and remain steadfast”. “Calls on servants to heed His prophets and He is a witness to their deeds.” “A bad ending belongs only to those who have chosen the life of this

Page 7

world and disobey Him and oppress His servants”. And “A good and eternal paradise belong to those servants who fear His majesty and do not follow their lascivious selves.” We believe a return to the teachings of the divine prophets is the only road leading to salvations. I have been told that Your Excellency follows the teachings of Jesus (PBUH), and believes in the divine promise of the rule of the righteous on Earth.

We also believe that Jesus Christ (PBUH) was one of the great prophets of the Almighty. He has been repeatedly praised in the Koran. Jesus (PBUH) has been quoted in Koran as well; [19,36] And surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore serves Him; this is the right path, Marium.

Service to and obedience of the Almighty is the credo of all divine messengers. The God of all people in Europe, Asia, Africa, America, the Pacific and the rest of the world is one. He is the Almighty who wants to guide and give dignity to all His servants. He has given greatness to Humans.

We again read in the Holy Book: “The Almighty God sent His prophets with miracles and
clear signs to guide the people and show them divine signs and purity them from sins and pollutions. And He sent the Book and the balance so that the people display justice and avoid the rebellious.”

All of the above verses can be seen, one way or the other, in the Good Book as well.
Divine prophets have promised: The day will come when all humans will congregate before the court of the Almighty, so that their deeds are examined. The good will be directed towards Haven and evildoers will meet divine retribution. I trust both of us believe in such a day, but it will not be easy to calculate the actions of rulers, because we must be answerable to our nations and all others whose lives have been directly or indirectly effected by our actions.

All prophets, speak of peace and tranquillity for man – based on monotheism, justice and respect for human dignity.

Do you not think that if all of us come to believe in and abide by these principles, that is, monotheism, worship of God, justice, respect for the dignity of man, belief in the Last Day, we can overcome the present problems of the world – that are the result of disobedience to the Almighty and the teachings of prophets – and improve our performance?

Do you not think that belief in these principles promotes and guarantees peace, friendship and justice?

Do you not think that the aforementioned written or unwritten principles are universally respected?

Will you not accept this invitation? That is, a genuine return to the teachings of prophets, to monotheism and justice, to preserve human dignity and obedience to the Almighty and His

Mr President,

Page 8

History tells us that repressive and cruel governments do not survive. God has entrusted The fate of man to them. The Almighty has not left the universe and humanity to their own devices. Many things have happened contrary to the wishes and plans of governments. These tell us that there is a higher power at work and all events are determined by Him. Can one deny the signs of change in the world today?

Is this situation of the world today comparable to that of ten years ago? Changes happen fast and come at a furious pace.

The people of the world are not happy with the status quo and pay little heed to the promises and comments made by a number of influential world leaders. Many people around the wolrd feel insecure and oppose the spreading of insecurity and war and do not approve of and accept dubious policies.

The people are protesting the increasing gap between the haves and the have-nots and the rich and poor countries.

The people are disgusted with increasing corruption.

The people of many countries are angry about the attacks on their cultural foundations and the disintegration of families. They are equally dismayed with the fading of care and compassion. The people of the world have no faith in international organisations, because their rights are not advocated by these organisations.

Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems.

We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point –that is the Almighty God. Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems. My question for you is: “Do younot want to join them?”

Mr President,

Whether we like it or not, the world is gravitating towards faith in the Almighty and justiceand the will of God will prevail over all things.

Vasalam Ala Man Ataba’al hoda

Mahmood Ahmadi-Najad

President of the Islamic Republic of Iran

Sunday, June 19, 2005


Thoughts on Bush's "Plan" for Iraq

Posted by Nostradamnthem

Paragraph 1, the intro. He promises to outline what he calls a strategy that will "change America's course in Iraq, and help us succeed in the fight against terror".

Yeah, right. I'm going to show you why I think this is a complete fantasy. A pipe dream - though it isn't tobacco you'd have to smoke to believe in this plan.

Paragraph 2 & 3 - He mentions Iraqi voting, and then identifies Al-Qaeda, Sunni Muslims, Radical Shia Muslims and Iran as the enemies opposing the US. So who is left in Iraq that isn't an enemy? And those "Radical Shia elements" he mentions, aren't they really just Iraqis who don't want their country occupied by a foreign army?

Paragraph 4 - The famous "Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me."

Notice, no admission that he made any mistake at all, ever. And no admission that any specific decision or tactic was an error. Only "where mistakes have been made". He is not admitting ANY mistake here, but it will fool a lot of people.

Paragraph 5 - Contains "We benefitted from the thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Congressman Lee Hamilton. In our discussions, we all agreed that there is no magic formula for success in Iraq. And one message came through loud and clear: Failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States" .

He ignored nearly all of the Baker - Hamilton recommendations. He's also ignoring that HE (not WE) has already failed in Iraq, failed utterly and totally, and the situation is not redeeemable by the US. It's our disaster now - HE made it, WE own it and WE will pay for it for the next 20 years at least. And pay in terms of both money and danger.

Paragraph 6 - Bush plays the old fear card again and tells us that if we fail to achieve HIS objectives in Iraq, we'll get nuked by Islamic terrorists.

But notice, he's saying "failure" yet doesn't define that term.

Paragraph 7 - "Only Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people. "

The first time I've heard him speak the truth. I wonder if he realized he was? But if that's true, what are we still doing there? Shouldn't we get out of the way and let them do what they need to do?

Paragraph 7 - Contains this statement - "Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes. They report that it does. They also report that this plan can work. "

Of course they report that. He neglects to remind us that just last week he removed two of the long-time, experienced generals in Iraq who kept telling him this 'surge' idea was doomed to fail, and replaced them with less experienced folks who will pay for their promotions by saluting any dirty shorts he runs up the flagpole.

Paragraph 8 - "Now let me explain the main elements of this effort: The Iraqi government will appoint a military commander and two deputy commanders for their capital. The Iraqi government will deploy Iraqi Army and National Police brigades across Baghdad's nine districts."

What the hell have they done so far, nothing? What's new about this? And if this is new, why did we not demand this a long time ago?

"When these forces are fully deployed, there will be 18 Iraqi Army and National Police brigades committed to this effort, along with local police. These Iraqi forces will operate from local police stations -- conducting patrols and setting up checkpoints, and going door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad residents."

Unless the news media are ALL constantly lying to us, the Iraqi Army and National Police are full of death squads on both sides. So how is this going to help? Does he expect that just because he or his puppet say so that they will all turn in their death squad membership cards?

Paragraph 9 - 20, 000 more troops. I want to point out that we have more troops than that who've been wounded (not counting killed) and are now missing arms, legs, portions of their brains.

AND, it's a small fraction of the numbers there now. So apparently we're going to try 'spot cleaning'. But we did that already. An example would be our attempts to go into Sadr City multiple times. How is this a new strategy?

Paragraph 10 - He says that this time will be different because now we'll have the numbers to hold the areas we cleared, unlike in the past.

Isn't that an admission that this is NOT a new strategy, but merely more of the same? And what about the fact that the police death squads moved into the cleared neighborhoods as soon as we gave them the turf to protect? How is he going to stop that?

But there is also this - "This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter those neighborhoods -- and Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated. "

Well, golly. Isn't Maliki allegedly holding power only thru the threat of Muqtad al-Sadr's militia? Notice, Bush is saying only that troops will have a 'green light' to go into neighborhoods. He is not saying Maliki or someone else in the government won't warn their supporter militias, and that we won't get either ambushed or find everyone gone until after we leave again.

Paragraph 11 - "I've made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended. If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people -- and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people. "

This is a total fantasy on Bush's part. He has already said a hundred times we won't leave this war while he is president. And there is no historical reason whatsoever to think the Iraqi "government" will decide to do anything for the good of the country - they're too invested in fighting for power over religious and tribal lines. Solve the religion problem, they'll still fight for tribal power.

Paragraph 12 - Here's the 'cover my ass' part. (You knew it was in there somewhere, right?) "This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks. Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering."

Basically, this is predicting that there will be no discernable change in anything after this escalation of troops, but that we can't call it a failed attempt because he's already told us nothing would change and blamed it on the other guys. Sort of a "you'll know my strategy is working when YOUR husband or kid gets killed" cop-out. Face it, if you can't stop the other guys from doing what they're doing, you're failing. And Bush just admitted failure before we start.

Paragraph 13 - "America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced".

OK, what does Bush propose to do when they do fall down on the job? We already know he won't pull our troops out. Will he depose the officers of the government? HE CAN'T - they were elected by the Iraqi people. Remember the 'democracy on the march' crap, the 'purple fingers' stuff? He would have to be willing to be known as the Imperialist who knocked off two governments in a row in the same nation, both times in violation of international law. So, we won't pull out, and we can't replace the do-nothing puppets, so what leverage does the puppeteer have left? Is he going to stop shipments of video games, Rolexes, I-pods and scotch whisky to Maliki?

Paragraph 14 - A list of what the Iraqi government will do. I wonder, who proposed the list? It is after all meaningless for the puppets to agree to what the string puller makes them do.

Paragraph 15 - A list of what the Bush administration will do. In my opinion, we're giving a dead whore a make-over job and calling her a virgin here. I don't see where anything proposed is 'new' at all, only more of some of the things we've tried already.

Paragraph 16 - "As we make these changes, we will continue to pursue al Qaeda and foreign fighters."

Wasn't this whole thing supposed to be about making the Iraqi's do this work?

Paragraph 17 - "Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders, and they are protecting the local population. Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their willingness to take on al Qaeda."

The news media must be falling down on the job again. I don't recall reading or hearing about any Iraqi resistance to al Qaeda.

"And as a result, our commanders believe we have an opportunity to deal a serious blow to the terrorists. So I have given orders to increase American forces in Anbar Province by 4,000 troops. These troops will work with Iraqi and tribal forces to keep up the pressure on the terrorists. America's men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanistan -- and we will not allow them to re-establish it in Iraq. "

I repeat, what is different about this? I suggest this is more of an escalation than a change.

"America's men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanistan"

Let us not forget too that Bush also publicly gave the Taliban 4 months warning of the attack, giving al Qaeda plenty of time to move over the border into Pakistan. So what is he bragging about?

Paragraph 18 - "Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria."

Does the term "Axis of Evil" sound familiar? He continues on to use a not-so-thinly veiled threat of military action against the two...

"We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq. "

Paragraph 19 - "We're also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence-sharing and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region. "

Well, "recently ordered the deployment" involves troops and equipment that aren't part of the 20 thousand, so there is really more to this escalation than they are admitting. We're also deploying military systems, and moving into Turkey. And we will STILL attack Iran when Bush is ready - so look for the draft before 2009, because this war deserter thinks he can control a world full of terrorists with a marching military force, and it will have to grow every year to keep up with his ambitions.

Paragraph 20 - Contains "Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists and a strategic threat to their survival. These nations have a stake in a successful Iraq that is at peace with its neighbors, and they must step up their support for Iraq's unity government."

Well, I think that if REAL democracy and human rights ever came to Iraq, that would threaten the governments of these countries even more than an American defeat. Face it, if we withdraw or lose, the Saudi royal house will still control that nation and all it's wealth. If we win, and Iraq becomes a truly democratic nation, those princes are in deep trouble and their lives as they know them are over. The other states are still known to kill and or torture political opponents - as comparatively good as Egypt is, it's one of our 'secret rendition' countries where they torture prisoners. How much pressure would democracy put on them? Lots, I think. No, I believe the other nations Bush mentions have more at stake from an American win in Iraq than they do from a defeat. If we're beaten, they'll just 'disappear' any suspected opponents until there aren't any terrorists left.

Paragraph 21 - Starts with "The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time".

Bush is blaming the entire thing on an ideological struggle, not on the fact that he invaded a country he had no need to invade, did it illegally, and totally ignored the need for any plan or intelligent approach to what he was planning to do. He's also ignoring the fact that it's more likely the case that these terrorists grow out of living in filthy rich countries where all the wealth goes to the royal families and the people themselves are living in near starvation with no future, no rights, no social benefits and no hope, than it is the fault of any ideology. But calling it an ideology does provide him another rationalization for never ending the war-mongering.

Paragraph 22 - Just fluff.

Paragraph 23 - More 'cover my ass' talk. "The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent. Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue -- and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties. The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer to success. I believe that it will. "

So, we can't measure success by our kids not being killed, but he offers no other measure? So we have no way to know if this works or not? "Trust me!"

Paragraph 24 - "Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship. "

So, again, there is no way to define an end to this war? It must be awfully profitable to the Bush family.

"But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world -- a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law, respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its people. A democratic Iraq will not be perfect. But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them -- and it will help bring a future of peace and security for our children and our grandchildren. "

Somebody please show me something in recent history to help me believe this will EVER happen. Please. But not the chillum-pipe. Real events only.

Paragraph 25 - Bush talks about his reasons for not wanting to leave Iraq. He describes the mess that will ensue. I suggest that the identical mess he describes is now inevitable because of his incompetence and malfeasance regarding the entire effort, and that all he is doing with this troop escalation is to try to buy enough staying power to get out of the White House and blame the debacle on the next president. If he leaves now he's not only the guy who started a war for personal reasons and then totally screwed the pooch on the deal, but the one who got millions killed in a civil war that didn't have to happen, and all in the same presidency. So THAT is the reason Bush will never get us out of Iraq, and everything else is lies to justify it.

Paragraph 26 - Some bullshit about working with Congress, but a statement that indicates he has no intention of doing anything Congress wants unless it's his way. "If members have improvements that can be made, we will make them. "

See that word "improvements"? You know damned well that the ideas will only be considered to be improvements to the degree that they support the Bush agenda. And what that means is that any criticism, any demands for accountablity or control on the part of Congress will be rejected out of hand. And suggestions that don't support escalation will not be acceptable.

Paragraph 27 - The devil will always tell you what he's going to do, only he'll tell you in terms you don't understand. That's why he's called the Deceiver. Lookie here:

"Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group that will help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror. This group will meet regularly with me and my administration..."

If the rest of them are war-mongering suck-ups like Joe, this means a rubber-stamp committee that Bush will claim represents Congress, even though we all know Joe was elected by Republicans because he betrayed his own party's agenda. You can expect the others to be suck-ups to the office as well. Maybe Hillary will be one of them. She seems to like the war - but then, I think the Clintons are now shareholders in the Carlyle Group too.

"We can begin by working together to increase the size of the active Army and Marine Corps, so that America has the Armed Forces we need for the 21st century."

You're warned here - do you understand what he's saying? Here comes that draft that the No Child Left Behind database was built to support. No more registering for the draft (or not) when you turn 18. You're automatically registered by the school's testing program unless you were home-schooled, and that may have been covered too, I just don't know.

"We also need to examine ways to mobilize talented American civilians to deploy overseas, where they can help build democratic institutions in communities and nations recovering from war and tyranny. "

The Deceiver continues. Do I really need to explain this? It's a draft of sorts too for folks too old or too educated to use up as IED targets. Doctors, nurses, engineers, people who build and support infrastructure like phone systems, highways, wastewater and purification plants, etc. You will be 'drafted' as well, and find yourself working in some dirty guerilla infested nation Bush wants to take over, for a fourth of what you made here, while your kid is chasing around some desert or jungle getting shot at or blown up by some booby-trap bomb.

Paragraph 28 - Starts with "In these dangerous times, the United States is blessed to have extraordinary and selfless men and women willing to step forward and defend us. These young Americans understand that our cause in Iraq is noble and necessary... "

But apparently we're not blessed with our president's children believing any of this. And my question here is this - If he can't convince his own children of the need to serve in this 'great ideological struggle', then why should we believe in it or send our own kids? Honestly, if Bush's girls were on the front lines in Iraq, I'd shut up and leave him alone. Hell, I'd even consider that I might be wrong and he might be right about the need for this war.

Paragraph 29 - He starts with "Fellow citizens". How dare he call himself one of us. Didn't he go AWOL during a war? Yes he did. Hasn't he done literally everything he could to destroy the futures of American families while he gets rich by being the corporate CEO's sugar plum fairy? Yes he has. No, this posturing corporate boy-toy and war profiteer is not MY fellow citizen.

Paragraph 30 - He wraps up by playing the God card ("the Author of Liberty"). Can't let the Evangelical base get away, can we?